Der Orthopade · 2019
[Arthroplasty at the proximal interphalengeal joint].
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schindele Stephan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: For the treatment of deformed finger middle joints that occur as a result of osteoarthritis or inflammatory and post-traumatic destruction, artificial joint replacement is an option to arthrodesis. Hereby mobility can be obtained, which is why this method generally has a higher acceptance.
DISCUSSION: What clinical and subjective results can be expected after artificial finger middle joint replacement and what is the expected complication rate for the different types of joints?
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We present our experiences with artificial joint replacement with various implants over the past decades as well as promising new developments of the last 10 years.
RESULTS: The silicone implant still remains the gold standard in joint replacement. For these implants, good long-term results and low revision rates have been documented. Due to the soft flexible material, however, lateral stability and preoperatively-existing axis deviations seem problematic. Initial studies with modular resurfacing implants appear promising and may eventually replace the silicone spacer over the long term. Consequently, long-term results of these modern implants are pending.
CONCLUSIONS: Painful osteoarthritis of the finger joint can be treated well with motion-preserving artificial joints. The complication rate appears to be decreasing. New generation modular surface prostheses seem to be relatively equal to the silicone spacer in terms of long-term outcomes.
DISCUSSION: What clinical and subjective results can be expected after artificial finger middle joint replacement and what is the expected complication rate for the different types of joints?
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We present our experiences with artificial joint replacement with various implants over the past decades as well as promising new developments of the last 10 years.
RESULTS: The silicone implant still remains the gold standard in joint replacement. For these implants, good long-term results and low revision rates have been documented. Due to the soft flexible material, however, lateral stability and preoperatively-existing axis deviations seem problematic. Initial studies with modular resurfacing implants appear promising and may eventually replace the silicone spacer over the long term. Consequently, long-term results of these modern implants are pending.
CONCLUSIONS: Painful osteoarthritis of the finger joint can be treated well with motion-preserving artificial joints. The complication rate appears to be decreasing. New generation modular surface prostheses seem to be relatively equal to the silicone spacer in terms of long-term outcomes.